United GRU-ORD Divert to MIA to Offload Purser

[DownIn3Green]

OK...I backed it up after my last 2 posts...

2 Posters do not claim to be pilots (on their public profile)

RGBROCKHEAD1 or whatever...combat (and kudos to you sir if they are deserved) have nothing to do with "airline flying".

Command in combat is totally different from Command of a commercial jet...You case and opinion is closed...IMHO...


MU1002345A put all the numbers you want to up in your handle...
Your profile doesn't agree with your grammar... i.e.-you claim to be from the US, yet you refer to the CAPTAIN as the "Skipper"...

Grow up child...

And DANI....Please don't keep picking on 411A...I've supported him before, and will do again re: this thread....he may not always have an opinion that is popular, but read my previous posts...without 411A and many more like him you all would be driving Yellow Cabs in NYC...if you could get a license....

BTW...Do any of y'all actually know what a license is and if so....do anyone one of y'alls have one???

If I did "scab" as you seem to think, 1. that's my business...2. I find it very interesting that this thread has more "posters/members" that are either "probationary" or registered within the last 2 months than any other in recent memory....All UAL ALPO guys stand up and be counted, as well as "wanna-bees" who joined during the Air France thread...

[p51guy]

BTW...I worked for EAL before and after...

Now there is no question about your scab status. I've been on this site for years but recently changed to a different ID. You will never be forgiven for your decision so it is our business.

[rmiller774]

I am completely uninformed about this unfortunate happening. I do wish, however, that United Airlines would consider giving employees such as this Captain, who was returning from several months of sick leave, less stressful assignments than having them make 12 hour non-stop flights so soon upon their return. Ease them in steps back into the regular "grind".

[MU3001A]

DownIn3Green: MU1002345A put all the numbers you want to up in your handle...
Your profile doesn't agree with your grammar... i.e.-you claim to be from the US, yet you refer to the CAPTAIN as the "Skipper"...

Grow up child...

Wtf?

You're free enough with the gratuitous insults fella, but coming up short on logic or the ability to present a counter argument. Go figure?

My profile lists my location as the US and if you had read the thread you would have understood that the term "Skipper" was introduced by CRAYON who also lists his location as USA, not me. How'd you like them apples?

[MU3001A]

Flying Lawyer: I too wish that, when aviation matters involving specialist knowledge and expertise are being discussed, those who have neither would just read and learn from the various opinions offered by those who have. It wouldn't then be necessary to wade through the chaff to get to the wheat.

This is what gets me about some of the attitudes in evidence on this thread. I have no problem with those expressing the opinion that we should reserve judgment until all the facts are in, save for the obvious counterpoint that we are after all commenting on the Professional Pilots Rumour Network. But the idea that the discussion on this thread requires a familiarity with aviation matters involving specialist knowledge and expertise to contribute to the discussion or to figure out what was going on, is just plainly ridiculous. This was a minor spat between two employees, one senior and in a position of authority over the other. Of the type that happens all the time and across all occupations every day of the week. The only material difference being this spat occurred on board an airliner in the flight levels and resulted in a diversion to an alternate airfield rather than one party or the other storming of to the managers office to register a grievance.

Sense of proportion people.

[Les Shore]

CRM tutorial

I wasn't going to wade into this but happened across this exchange on another forum. It might reassure some pax who think there are nothing but out of control egos in the cockpit. (You need to have a healthy ego to be a pilot)

FA: "I will question a captain's request or offer an alternative if I feel it's in the best interests of the crew or passengers."

CA:"That's fine. I would hope you would. I won't mind in the slightest and encourage all my crews to do so, especially if they think-rightly or wrongly-that I'm about to make a mistake, or could maybe do something better. I'll listen and consider carefully what you've said. You might well know something I don't that affects or changes the situation. If you do, rest assured, I'll thank you and modify my request or plan accordingly.

However, if after having heard and considered what you have to say, I stick to my original request, despite your objections, and you then still refuse, be in no doubt you will suffer the consequences.

We should all work well together to complete a flight safely and with the best service for the passengers. That's the way it is supposed to work."

.
Don't think that was the management style at UAL that day. It might have saved a whole mess of problems.

[pattern_is_full]

I would like

...to hear the captain's side.

Not because I think the alleged crew posts here are unsubstantiated and thus false, but because they are unsubstantiated and thus unsubstantiated (two very different things).

I don't see any clear facts so far that justify some of the over-the-top comments on either side of the issue.

-------------

In the interests of accuracy, since the subject was raised, I'll just point out that in The Caine Mutiny, Captain Queeg (note spelling) was not on trial. His subordinate officers were on trial - for mutiny. It was their defense attorney who turned the tables on Queeg - with mixed feelings - not a prosecutor.

And it was not Queeg's command decisions in the face of enemy fire, and a storm, that were his real downfall - it was a fuss he made about missing strawberries or ice cream or some such in the ship's mess (and his reaction under questioning about it) that ultimately brought his judgement into question before the court.

Fiction, in any event.

(Although I'll offer up this quote for the next time a FBW fracas begins: Lieutenant to new Ensign: "The first thing you've got to learn about this ship is that she was designed by geniuses to be run by idiots.")

[411A]

I think 411A, Rainboe and others on the same wave length should read carefully the BOAC post.

Don't know about the others you mention, but I ignored BOAC long ago and quite frankly am not the least bit interested.
As for Dani...out to lunch would be my assessment...don't pay much attention to him, either.

As for CC on my flights, now or in the future, we get along just fine, so long as they do what I tell 'em to do, period.
If not...offloaded, pronto.
And, what's more, the company backs me up, every time.

Case closed.

[Atlanta-Driver]

Out to lunch

Seems that the lot here is out to lunch. Take a chill pill ladies and gents the issue (What issue?) is not worth popping a vein in the head.

It's very simple;

If the Captain made the wrong decision he will be skinned if not then I fail to see where there's a problem.

[fullforward]

411A

Congrats!
Perfect, finally something making sense here.
After 30 years in this industry and watching many bozos using CRM letters to disseminate useless BS, many of us are really fed up on how things degraded today, re captain real roles. Because WE let this happen in first place.

Example: I was commuting on paid ticket on a long haul flight back home, with Continental. I was in uniform and requested the FA permission to salute the guys in the FD, if possible, of course. It was conceded.
I chatted with them for a few minutes and the captain, after finding out I was dispatched in coach, kindly invited me to business (nothing unsual, I always invite fellow captains and pursers that show up properly to business class and receive the same treatment). There was plenty of C empty seats on this particular flight.

I went to my firstly assigned seat, waiting for someone direct me to the new seat. After take off and level off, I nicely asked the purser about the captain invitation.
She rudely answered: yes, but I will not put you in business.

While I was disembarking the captain intercepted me at the door, and visibly embarrassed said: "look were our industry is dragging us all! Next time they will decide on who fly the leg!".

Need to say more?

[MU3001A]

411A

Would doing what you tell 'em to do include dropping everything to provide you with completed crew decs in the middle of cabin service, early in an 11 hour flight? Then if the combination of security SOP's and lack of available crew meant the decs were pushed under the cockpit door instead of handed to you in person. Would this constitute reasonable grounds for chewing out the individual responsible for this shocking breach of protocol within the hearing of 1st class passengers, stewing over the matter for a further 5 hours then electing to divert the flight to offload the offender with no thought given to the disruption ensuing to passengers, operations or other parties on the ground in MIA?

I fully realize that having no experience of being a 4 striper entrusted with the command of a flag carrier aircraft in long haul operations, that I may struggle to comprehend your explanation of the justification for the captain's actions in this instance, but please try.

Bless.

[fullforward]

My above statement in any way support this captain decision in first place.
I would consider this extreme measure only in case the purser or anybody else onboard could jeopardize flight or individual safety.

[eliptic]

my conclusion

to me it gets more and more clear that this happening are "as it looks", and moreover it will probably happen again as long some individuals are on command.

anyway i did learn something new, i didn't know there was so much frictions between the crew

it´s like a downstairs upstairs soap opera

Hmm..or maybe not just between the crew:

Pulled Off Plane Before Flight Last Week



"The airport's executive director says the arrest resulted from a "clash of personalities" between the plane's captain and an airport screener."

New Information about AirTran Pilot Arrest - wtvr

[Les Shore]

411 A, if you asked CC to strip naked to do the meal service would you expect them to follow that order? You do have absolute authority.

[Flying Lawyer]

MU3001A

This was a minor spat between two employees, one senior and in a position of authority over the other. Of the type that happens all the time and across all occupations every day of the week.

Was it?
You are clearly convinced of that - you've made 20 posts on this thread.
If it was, then FWIW (very little - I'm not an airline pilot) the captain appears to be OTT.
However, I wonder if it will turn out to be quite as simple as just the one incident described when all the facts are known.

_______________


Re "I think 411A, Rainboe and others on the same wave length should read carefully the BOAC post."
Most posts which contributed nothing to the discussion except 'I agree with X,Y or Z' have been removed by the Mods. I assume that SLFguy's suggestion was missed in the cull.
(He'd already made up his mind by post #8! )

[TiiberiusKirk]

Frankly I'm amazed that so many conclusions have been drawn, and people taking such entrenched positions, with only two sides of the story having been told - a press report, and one (allegedly) involved party.
I expect that there are perhaps another three or more sides to this event yet to be told, with the real truth lying somewhere between them all.

[411A]

Would doing what you tell 'em to do include dropping everything to provide you with completed crew decs in the middle of cabin service, early in an 11 hour flight? Then if the combination of security SOP's and lack of available crew meant the decs were pushed under the cockpit door instead of handed to you in person.

Since you asked...so long as I recived the requested documents in a reasonable period of time, it would make absolutely no difference to me whatsoever how they were delivered...under the door would be quite satisfactory.
However...you should realise that my particular situation is quite different than those Captains at UAL.
I do contract seasonal flying now, and the cabin supervisors provided are all ex-Royal Jordanian, with at least 20 years in the business.
The rest of the CC are generally quite young and inexperienced, and require constant supervision by the cabin supervisor, to ensure that our 362 passengers are served in a reasonable manner, without the cabin being thrown into a constant state of chaos.
So, if I needed a certain item, I would have the courtesy to ask at a less busy time, so that the cabin supervisor could do his/her job without undue disruption.
In this way I receive the respect and cooperation I expect, and the CC has my cooperation so that they can do the job for which they were hired in the first place.

[Michael Birbeck]

The rest of the CC are generally quite young and inexperienced, and require constant supervision by the cabin supervisor, to ensure that our 362 passengers are served in a reasonable manner, without the cabin being thrown into a constant state of chaos.

So, if I needed a certain item, I would have the courtesy to ask at a less busy time, so that the cabin supervisor could do his/her job without undue disruption.

In this way I receive the respect and cooperation I expect, and the CC has my cooperation so that they can do the job for which they were hired in the first place.

Sounds suspiciously like that CRM mixed wth that leadership BS to me!

[SaturnV]

Downin3Green,

Here is a thread about a CA exercising command discretion in not allowing a non-flying UAL pilot to ride in the jumpseat of a UAL 757 in 2006, which suggests there is lingering animosity 20+ years later. (The thread gets interesting about half-way down, with discussion of a "jumpseat protection list"... (Nice euphemism, BTW. Potential CRM issues associated with such would take this thread too far afield.)

Why would UA pilot refuse to allow non flying United pilot to fly in jumpseat? [Archive] - FlyerTalk Forums

That aside, I think a diversion because of an issue arising between the pilot(s) flying and the cabin crew is exceedingly rare, and perhaps unique in the post 9/11 era; where, at least in the United States, bells and whistles are likely to sound at the TSA for any diversion of an inbound international flight. IMO, the CA may have more trouble with TSA about the diversion than with UAL management, depending on the reason he gave Miami Center for having to divert, and its correspondence to the truth.

[virginblue]

I have no idea how the judge would rule, but I do know this: The judge would want a great deal more information before coming to a conclusion - including the captain’s side of the story. (As Rainboe has sensibly been urging.)
A judge reading this thread would be amazed at the way some posters condemn the captain on so little information, especially without knowing his side of the story, and surprised that those who have never operated an airliner express an opinion at all. (Unless the judge had been reading PPRuNe for years and had seen it happen many times before.)
“The judge may have never seen a cockpit from the inside or even flown.”
True, and would probably have no expertise in the operation of airliners. That's why the parties would probably call expert evidence from people who have. ie Experienced airline captains.
Neither side’s lawyers (unless they were spectacularly incompetent) would attach any weight to the opinion of someone who wasn’t and never had been a professional airline pilot and based his/her opinion upon being a frequent traveller, or having managerial experience in some other field or holding a PPL.

The underlying question would be pretty straightforward: Was there a threat - and if so, was it justified to wait for 5 hours to divert because the decision was so difficult to make?

So it all boils down to the factual scenario - what did acutally happen on board of that aircraft? First come the facts, than the expert witnesses who assess the facts as provided by the witnesses. So there will most likely be a plethora of witnesses (including independent witnesses with no affiliation to either side) who will describe it in the way it has been described by BoF in this thread (totally true or only partially true, whatever - the sheer numbers will not be in favour of the captain). The CA will tell his side of the story as well, and I am pretty sure that every judge will take into consideration that he is the most senior professional on board and that he has the authority to take whatever action is needed to guarantee the safe operation of the aircraft, i.e. address any real threat or reasonably assume that a certain situation is threatening even if it turns out after review that it was not. However, I doubt that a judge will take the view like many on this thread that the definition what facts amount to a threat for the safe operation of the aircraft is COMPLETELY up to the captain when a review takes place. The captain will have the utmost discretion to decide this, but there are clearly some limits - evidently so if the airline takes a wholly different view than the captain. What next? No sugar with the coffee is a threat just because the captain says so? In short, of course there will be expert witnesses, but they do not assess a theoretical scenario, but the facts as they are presented by the court after hearing all witnesses. And as far as expert witnesses are concerned in a case such as this - United will easily find a Dani-style expert witness, the captain a Rainboe-style expert witness. In the end it is up to the judge to assess as a layman what expert evidence thrown at him is more convincing to him. Expert witnesses enable the judge to make a somewhat learned decision, but if there is, as so often, conflicting expert evidence, not much is won from the judge's point of view. Unless he tosses a coin, as a human being faced with such a dilemma he will apply common sense and a test reasonableness as long as the burden of proof and evidence presented to hin allows it.

Just in case if oyu are wondering, I am no layman as far as law is concerned, quite to the contrary. The theoretical application of law is one thing, how it works out in the court-room is another. You will know that as much as I do. Based on an assessment what the most likely evidence presented to a court would be, I would be very very hesitant to tell the captain that his case is rock solid and that he has nothing to worry about. So how about a golden hand-shake?